Search results

I just had another thought about how to explain what an RCT is supposed to do. Imaging that you’re growing new flowers for the first time, and you want to figure out if the special fertiliser is making them grow faster. If you put fertiliser on all of the flowers, you won’t know if it helped...

The p-values seem impressive but the graphs show a lot of overlap: figure 2 Figure 2. Reduced PMNFD and SGNFD in patients with long COVID compared to controls. (A) Individual values of PMNFD of all patients versus controls; (B) mean and standard deviation of SGNFD of all patients versus...

At least according to their own reports online. I agree that it could at least be clarified a bit. The latest factsheet also warns about excessive rest, but is very clear that you have to rest as much as you need, and doing more won’t make you better and might harm you.

Depending on how you define «too much rest», it can worsen your overall health. An extreme example would be someone who can leave their house twice a week without PEM suddenly deciding that strict bedrest would be good for them. We’ve seen this kind of extreme rest promoted in some ME/CFS...

[edited out PCA question that misunderstood the method] That seems like the kind of bad practice that is bound to end up causing some confusion down the line. I don’t doubt that you or @DMissa might think that way because you are very rigorous, but judging by the papers we read here every day...

So it’s not a four year cohort study then.

The list of treatment trials might be useful - are anyone able to download it?

The introduction doesn’t tell me anything about what inflammation actually is. As I missing something?

Absolutely, I was just talking about this context where the goal is to get them to stop using CBT and GET for ME/CFS.

I think they might sometimes be called «unit histograms», at least according to this blog. I prefer this: Over these two: Because the first make it so much easier to compare the different plots because the differences along the X-axis aren’t halved in size visually by making everything...

You can make histograms with dots instead or rectangles. That way you get to see the individual data points (with slight binning), but it’s also easy to compare the distributions of the values.

I really don’t understand the need to discuss the diagnostic criteria. None of the trials were good enough or demonstrated any benefit in any sufficiently reliable outcomes. There is no evidence for CBT or GET for any kind of conditions with chronic fatigue. Just go after the results and...

If they looked a bit closer at those interventions they would have seen that most of them are about how to more effectively gaslight the patients. We need to teach the providers to say «I don’t know» and «I’m not able to treat your symptoms, but I will help you get the help you need to manage...

Wouldn’t we have seen it by now if LC was caused by autoimmunity towards ANO2, which is presumably what he’s suggesting? And how would it be different from MS?

It’s funny how all of the negative findings are explained away, and all of the positive findings are in line with what the literature tells us. It’s almost as if the authors are biased towards VR. Or the games just didn’t adjust their difficulty quickly enough, or had a difficulty ceiling.

The text is worth reading. It takes an different approach to the BPS ideology and demonstrates how it can’t be allowed to exist in its current form within the context of the laws and ethical obligations that health institutions are bound by. BPS is inherently biased.

I hope you find something. I’ve never had much luck explaining it to people that aren’t aware of it yet, but here’s another effort: Perhaps comparing it to how superstitions come to be might be a way forward. People do something special and then they win a small sum in the lottery the next day...

I should have been clearer that it’s to aid the visual inspection of the data. And at some point you’d have to address the question of significant digits. Is it really that important to see the difference between 32.3 and 32 on a scale between 0 and 50? I’d argue it’s not worth the cost of...

I meant to the nearest value in increments of 1, but that almost looks like the width of a dot in this case. Those are not histograms, though. Histograms start at the left and stack towards the right, like using «align left» in a text document. The new plot in that paper uses the equivalent of...

The bins are a good point, but how much granularity do you realistically need? On that graph, would it be sufficient to round to the nearest point? At some point pixels and resolution of the image will create arbitrary bins, so it’s not like it’s entirely avoidable. So when is the tradeoff...